When Canada’s Supreme Court released its sweeping judgment on aboriginal rights Thursday, pipeline opponents were jubilant.

“There is no blank cheque for the Northern Gateway project,” Council of Canadians chair Maude Barlow said, referring to a proposed Enbridge pipeline that would bring oil from Alberta’s tarsands to the British Columbia coast.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the B.C. Union of Chiefs predicted the decision would affect Kinder Morgan’s scheme to expand its Trans Mountain pipeline system, which moves oil across the Rockies to Vancouver.

Others said the ruling could scupper TransCanada Corp.’s plan to build the so-called Energy East pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick.

First, it doesn’t exclude aboriginal lands from provincial laws. Provinces are free to make laws about matters like oil drilling and forestry. But these laws must be applied to lands under aboriginal title in a manner that protects native rights.

Second, the decision does not give first nations a veto over government-authorized projects that affect their lands.

In fact, the eight justices ruled that for purposes of “building up infrastructure’ or “general economic development,” federal and provincial governments can override the wishes of first nations — even those that possess clear aboriginal title to their territory through treaties or court decisions.

But governments can do so only if they adhere to three principles.

First, they have to consult with the First Nation in a meaningful way, in an effort to win its consent.

Second, they must have a “compelling and substantial public purpose” for overriding a first nation if that consent is not obtained.

Third, they must maintain their constitutional duty to protect First Nations. In particular, they must act in a manner that protects aboriginal territory for future generations.

In areas where First Nations have not obtained clear aboriginal title (and that involves most of B.C. as well as a big chunk of land — including Ottawa — in Eastern Ontario), governments have more leeway for action.

All they must do is consult seriously. They need not try to gain consent.

But the court ruled that even here, governments must be careful.

If, for instance, Ottawa approves a project in an area that later is determined to come under aboriginal title, the project may have to be dismantled.

Potential pipeline investors might want to keep that particular part of the ruling in mind.

What does this all mean in practice?

The experts are divided. Indeed, some business groups have welcomed the court decision, saying it clarifies the meaning of aboriginal title — which is true.

But what also seems to be true is that First Nations are now in the driver’s seat when it comes to any economic development involving lands that are already aboriginal or could plausibly be labelled as such in the future.

That’s a big chunk of the country, particularly in the resource-rich north.

All three major parties in Ottawa are focusing on the resource economy as Canada’s engine of growth. All three want new oil pipelines built, although they differ on which ones.

Thursday’s decision makes clear that none of this can happen easily unless First Nations are willing.

This doesn’t mean that Canada’s pipeline projects are dead.

But it does mean that those who want them — including governments — are going to have to spend a lot more time and money wooing aboriginal people.

For Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives, who have taken a tough-love approach to first-nation issues, this would be quite a switch.

Thomas Walkom's column appears Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday.

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.